The Politics of Polarization

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I think that the general social response to the dynamic of polarization tends to be a self-reinforcing cycle in a way that's really dangerous. You have to have these anchor beliefs like people on the right need to believe that people on the left improperly view everything through the lens of race and are fundamentally seeing people as evil who aren't. And you need to interpret everything that you see happening through that lens in order to maintain self-consistency.

Read the full transcript here.

Is our adoption of beliefs primarily motivated by wanting to be the heroes of our own stories? Why do we have such a hard time understanding the stories other people are telling about themselves and the world? How can we reduce political polarization? How plausible are the various theories (conspiracy or otherwise) around the origins of COVID? Why don't the EA, Rationalist, and related communities focus more on transforming political landscapes? Free speech is incredibly important, of course; but does absolute free speech tip the scales in favor of misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda? Has the internet fundamentally changed the way we converse with each other, or has it merely scaled up and accelerated those conversations while preserving their original characteristics? Is there ultimately a way to land on a principled answer around free speech and censorship? Does a globally optimum free speech policy even exist, or are we stuck picking from a lineup of equally unsavory options?

Cate Hall is a co-founder and Chief Operating Officer of Alvea, a newly clinical stage EA biotech company. She is also the co-founder and President of Juniper Ventures, a biosecurity and pandemic preparedness foundry. She is a former Supreme Court litigator and former no. 1 female poker player in the world. She tweets at @catehall.

Staff